This thread is about systemd. So how exactly am I moving goal posts? All my statements were always in connection to systemd (and Gnome). Cos, you know, it's what the thread is about. Are you trying to say you took a statement of mine and responded to it completely disregarding the context in which that statement was made? Sorry, that makes no sense.

Gusar ... follow the thread of the dicussion:

1). "Let me turn that around on you: Why should Gentoo not package Gnome 3, other than some vague group of persons not liking systemd?"
To which I responded "that isn't a "turn around" because liking systemd, or not, is not really whats at issue, the issue is that with such "blessed dependency" the "choice" of systemd, or not, becomes "systemd (tout court)" as vertical intergration is removing choice from the equation."

2). "you're advocating for "choice" by... removing choice."
To which I responded "I've already countered such claims ... but ok, you can have your "choice" which *includes* such things as "voluntary servitude", "outcome neutrality", etc, etc"

3). "I'm not using systemd, and I don't intend to in the immediate future. And I never had interest in Gnome, not even the old much saner Gnome2, let alone the crazy thing that is the Gnome Shell. So this "servitude" you're talking about... yeah."
To which I responded "My point is not "systemd/gnome" equals "servitude" but that "choice" has a context (that would necessarily exclude certain options)."

4). "A context that does not apply to the software discussed here. So the point of making your point is... zero"
At this point you've moved the goal posts, as now its not a matter of "choice having a context" but the "context [...] does not apply to the software discussed here".

Your point 2). is missing one crucial sentence. My post was: "Basically, everything using systemd should be removed. So you're advocating for "choice" by... removing choice."

So it's pretty clear that by "removing choice" I meant "removing choice to run Gnome". But then you started about "servitude" and some "context" that has nothing to do with the discussion at hand - which was gnome and systemd and your advocacy to remove them from gentoo. To that I can only say: huh??

Making impossible requests, usually couched in polite language. For example,

khayyam wrote:

...you should extend the curtesy[sic] of following what I've said, not what you think I've said.

What? How can anyone possibly do that? I think you said or meant something. I'm wrong: utterly wrong, in fact, but that's what I think you said.

Clarifying without really clarifying, by repeating (sometimes quoting verbatim) previous utterances that have already been misunderstood. See, really, all of khayyam's previous post.

Deliberately being obtuse. For example,

khayyam wrote:

MustrumR wrote:

khayyam wrote:

3. remove any package that adopts systemd as a "blessed dependency".

People like GNOME. I use GNOME 3 on my touchscreen device.

MustrumR ... and your point is?

So based on these points, I've totally demolished any reasonable interpretation that khayyam's not being a troll. Right? There's absolutely no room for dissent or opposing position, nor is there any flaw or lack of clarity in my points. Right? I need not explain nor clarify further: I'd just be repeating myself and, well, that'd be trolling. Right?

There's some useful technical and ideological discussion in this thread but khayyam's last post tipped the balance. Locked.

- John_________________I can confirm that I have received between 0 and 999 National Security Letters.